Along the Shore

Most of us who know the Lord remember the Great Commission that He gave His church:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. (Matthew 28:19-20a)

Let me go ahead and say it … I fear that the system that we call the Cooperative Program, as wonderful and effective as it has been, may have actually distorted the local church’s understanding of the above-quoted Great Commission.  Indeed, I fear that the Cooperative Program may have served as a type of “inoculation” against a complete and true fulfillment of that commission.

Let me explain …

For several generations now, Southern Baptists have “pooled” their missions funds through the Cooperative Program.  Local churches have set aside a percentage of their undesignated receipts to go to the CP.  Checks are mailed monthly to state conventions, which keep a major portion of the funds, then the rest trickles down to the various and sundry entities of the SBC.  Lately, many churches have chosen to “by-pass” the state conventions and give directly to the SBC Executive Committee.

Periodically, churches receive beautiful, colorful reports from the various entities, telling them (the churches) what an incredible job they are “doing” in fulfilling the “Great Commission” by contributing the the Cooperative Program.  Occasionally, missionaries come to the churches to show their pictures and videos and give their reports.  Much of the visual and informational focus is upon fulfilling the Great Commission abroad, through the work of our amazingly effective International Mission Board.

But I wonder … does the average Southern Baptist realize that the majority of the dollars that they give remain within their own state, and that the vast majority of those dollars never leave the shores of the United States?  (Thank the Lord for Lottie Moon!!)

And all the while, millions of Southern Baptists remain in the comfort of their home churches, content and convinced that they have “done their part” to fulfill the Great Commission.

But have they … really?  Is this what Jesus envisioned for His church when he proclaimed the Great Commission?  Did He envision …

Therefore give a certain percentage regularly (10% or more recommended) and in so doing create large bureaucracies, systems, and facilities to administer and  fund other willing Christians to go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

Somehow, I don’t think so.

The same generation that instituted the Cooperative Program (1925) was the generation that envisioned and implemented Social Security (1935).  Tragically, we all know that millions of Americans have come to depend upon Social Security as the only means of provision for their retire ment years, and they have suffered greatly.   They have paid a harsh price for “placing all of their apples in a single basket.”  Could it be that a similar phenomenon has occurred in and through the Southern Baptist Cooperative Program?

Don’t get me wrong … the Cooperative Program has been a blessing.  God has used it in a mighty way.  But things have changed a lot since 1925 (an incredible understatement).  Yet my fear is that there are so many churches in the SBC that think of the CP as the “only way.”  I fear that there has, indeed, been a mass “inoculation” against “going.”  Instead, we have chosen to substitute giving.   And, in the process, we have created vast denominational systems of dependency … organizations, conventions, committees, offices, staff … which count on a regular diet of local church dollars to maintain those systems.  Instead of healthy, streamlined distributors of the Gospel message, I fear that we have huge, bulky, “low-mileage” consumers of our missions dollars.  How much “bang” are we actually getting for our missions “buck?”  Our systems are so huge now, that may not even be calculable.

Are we really “doing more together than we can do separately?”  After all, that’s what I’ve always been told about the CP.  But does that mantra really “wash” in the 21st century?  What really “works” better and “employs” more people, a huge corporate conglomerate, or 50,000 small businesses?

In the end, is mailing a check to the state Baptist convention, or to the Executive Committee, really  a satisfactory attempt at fulfilling the Great Commission?  Or should it just be a small part of the overall missions strategies of our local churches?

A little less give … and a lot more go …

I’m curious about how other pastors and churches are dealing with this issue.

Because of the way we “do” church, and the atmosphere of acceptance at our church, we normally have many guests in our chairs each Sunday. I have discovered that there are often times guests who are living together outside the bond of marriage. I am thankful that they are seeking the Lord. And I am thrilled that they feel welcome at our church.

But I am beginning to deal more and more with this issue of cohabitation with regard to membership in the church. As I counsel these couples who desire to unite with the church, I lovingly tell them that the issue of “living together” must be addressed first. My basic approach is this, “How can one commit to be a faithful, covenental person within the ‘Bride of Christ’ if he or she is unwilling to make a covenant relationship with his or her mate?”

I always offer patience, counseling, and love. I always offer to work with the couple to bring them into a biblical marriage relationship. And I always, always make sure they know they are welcome in our worship and the activities and life of the church. Invariably, these couples “agree” with me and acknowledge their need to be married in these private meetings. Often times they refer to themselves as “living in sin,” even though I never use the phrase. But then most never return to our church. I am sort of at my “wit’s end.”

Now, don’t get me wrong … I believe with all my heart that I am absolutely right in the stand that I take. I hold membership in very high regard. Membership in our church is sacrificial and covenantal. We have many more “attenders” than we have actual members.

But is there a better way to get this message across? Or are so many of these couples simply seeking a “Christian” endorsement of their behavior and relationship, then become offended when one is not offered?

I’m sorry that I have not been posting on more serious topics lately. I have been busy with the things of life and ministry.

But I have watched, with great interest, the drama that has been unfolding in the world of blogs since the recent, infamous meeting of some Southern Baptist pastors/bloggers with former president Jimmy Carter. The object of Carter’s invitation, and the meeting itself, seems to be an attempt to include some Southern Baptist representatives in the coming convocation known as the Celebration of a New Baptist Covenant in Atlanta in early January 2008.

Wade Burleson, in his post today, posed the question, “What Would You Do If Invited to Attend or Speak at the Celebration of the New Baptist Covenant?

Well, I decided to see what I could find out about this “New Baptist Covenant.” I went to the organization’s web site in an effort to read this “covenant.” Upon clicking this link, I was redirected to the web site of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. I must confess that I couldn’t find much of a covenant at all. This statement forms the only “meat” of a covenant that I could glean from the document dated April 10, 2006:

… a desire to work together to create an authentic and genuine prophetic Baptist voice in these complex times. They reaffirmed their commitment to traditional Baptist Values, including sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ and its implications for public and private morality. They specifically committed to their obligations as Christians to promote peace with justice, to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, care for the sick and the marginalized, welcome the strangers among us, and promote religious liberty and respect for religious diversity.”

Besides the obvious difficulty of that final “fuzzy” reference to “respect for religious diversity,” and the apparent profound influence of liberation theology upon this entire “covenant” and gathering, there remain other significant problems and issues.

I would like to address this issue from a rather simple perspective – the nature of “covenant.”

Frankly, I haven’t seen many bloggers address this particular issue. The gathering in Atlanta next year is the “Celebration of a New Baptist Covenant.” It is not simply a gathering of folks who “sort of” agree on a few things. It is not a “dialogue” or a discussion or a conference. It is the literal celebration of a covenant of partnership with all of the participants involved. Presence and participation = affirmation of this “covenant,” as limited and doctrinally “fuzzy” as said covenant may be.

But what, exactly, is a covenant? It is a formal, solemn, and binding agreement. More specifically, it is a written agreement or promise usually under seal between two or more parties especially for the performance of some action.

A covenant is a serious thing. It is a binding agreement. It is a partnership toward a goal. Marriage is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman. God made a unique and powerful covenant with His people, Israel. He has sealed the very costly and true New Covenant with His church with the blood of Jesus Christ. The word “covenant” is not a word that should be used lightly, or haphazardly. A covenant is a deep and abiding partnership that must not be entered into lightly.

So, to adequately answer Rev. Burleson’s question that he posed on his blog today, I must ask another question. Can I enter into a “covenant” relationship in order to accomplish the aforementioned Gospel causes with the people committed to celebrate this “New Baptist Covenant?”

In order to answer that question, I must examine the list of people committed to participation in and leadership in this “New Covenant.” With whom would I be entering into such a covenant? An up-to-date list is found on the organization’s web site. It includes people such as:

• Dr. Tony Campolo
• President Jimmy Carter
• President Bill Clinton
• Former Vice-President Al Gore
• Marian Wright Edelman – Founder of the Children’s Defense Fund
• Senator Lindsey Graham
• Senator Church Grassley
• Rev. Julie Pennington-Russell – Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church of Waco, Texas
• Bill Moyers – Ultra-liberal journalist.

In closing his thoughts today, Rev. Burleson stated:

It would seem to me, in following the example of the Apostle Paul, that the Southern Baptist and Christian response to the Celebration of the New Baptist Covenant should be both gracious and kind, and if called by God to do so, participatory. In no form or fashion should we treat with animosity and hatred those Baptists who attend the Celebration? We owe our very enemies love, and I know enough about the Baptists of all stripes who will be attending the Celebration to know there is no reason for me to despise or hate any of them, or denigrate them.

A commendable sentiment spoken from the heart of a brother. But, frankly, it is not the Baptists involved that I am truly worried about, despite the theological difficulties presented by some of the publicly documented statements by some that reflect significant (I believe) errors in their doctrine, particularly with regard to the Person and Work of Jesus Christ. In my church there are several “essentials” that we must agree upon … period. Based upon their public statements, there are some Baptists signatories of this covenant who fall short on the essentials (namely, President Carter and Dr. R. Kirbey Godsey). But I digress … this has been discussed at length on several blogs, so I need not elaborate further. All that aside … it is the political figures involved that truly concern me, and the obvious politicizing of this convocation.

As I examine this list, I must humbly confess that I could not and cannot, in good conscience, enter into a covenantal relationship with an organization or group represented by many of the above-mentioned covenental partners, including politicians, in order to “…promote peace with justice, to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, care for the sick and the marginalized, welcome the strangers among us, and promote religious liberty and respect for religious diversity.” I find that I am able to do all of these things, with complete freedom and in good conscience, through my local church and the work of my denomination.

I realize how very few people there are who care what I think, but this humble, small-town, conservative, “spooky” pastor would urge Southern Baptists to think carefully before aligning themselves with this particular movement. Unity is a noble goal, but unity at what cost? I sincerely believe that the purity of the Gospel message and the purity of the church trumps any efforts at unity among people of, not just diverse, but opposing (or absent?) doctrinal stances.

Okay … I broke down and started watching the stupid finale when I saw the absurd awards that were being passed out. The lady in the big bird suit was a hoot.

It defnintely could have been worse.

At least Jordin, the more deserving of the two, won the competiton. Maybe I’m just getting old, but trying to sound like an old record player just doesn’t “do it” for me. That’s not talent. It is only gimmick. The landscape of the music world is littered with boy-band wannabees like young Blake. I know he’s a sweet kid, and all, but …

It should have been Melinda Doolittle. The highlight of the night was her song with BeBe & CeCe. What a witness! I can’t wait to buy her first CD. I hope it is a Christian music project.

According to a recent Baptist Press article, congressional Democrats plan to end all federally funded abstinence programs by allowing Title V funds to expire in June. Title V was established in 1996 during the overhaul of the welfare system. It receives only a portion of the federal dollars invested in comprehensive sex education programs. Indeed, federal and state governments already spend $12 on comprehensive programs for every one dollar spent to teach abstinence.

Efforts to de-fund these abstinence programs rely heavily upon a study by the Mathematica Policy Research group which claims that abstinence education does not delay teenage sexual activity. However, this supposed research flies in the face of other studies which indicate the success of such programs.

It seems that congressional democrats would like to redirect Title V funds to groups like Planned Parenthood, which focus upon contraception … and provide abortion services.

Rep. John Dingell (D), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, stated, “abstinence-only programs seem to be a colossal failure.”

Rep. Diana DeGette (D) of Colorado proclaimed:

With all we know about how to prevent teen pregnancy and reduce sexually transmitted diseases, it is high time to redirect the millions of federal dollars that we squander every year on abstinence-only education to programs that actually work.

My take on this?

Well, it only took a couple of clicks on Google to get to some real information and statistics. I found some particularly helpful information throuth The National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. Their statistics show that teen pregnancy rates held steady prior to 1995 around 100 pregnancies per 1,000 females between the ages of 15 and 19. The rate peaked in 1990 at 117 pregnancies per 1,000. As of the most recent update in October 2006, that rate has decreased to 41 pregnancies per 1,000.

Here are the rates per 1,000 teen-age girls, ages 15-19, in a more graphic fashion. (Note – statistics were not provided for 2001, 2003 and 2004.

• 1995 – 100 (Before Title V Abstinence Funding)
• 1996 – 96 (After introduction of Title V Abstinence Funding)
• 1997 – 91
• 1998 – 89
• 1999 – 86
• 2000 – 84
• 2002 – 75
• 2005 – 41

Okay … what do we know for sure? We know that governmental investment in contraception promotion has always been in place. That has not changed. It was going on when I was in school. But what has changed? What occurred in 1996 that was on the front-end of the literal nose-dive in teen pregnancy rates?

One word … ABSTINENCE. Faith-based program like True Love Waits. Federally funded, Title V programs.

One would have to be a bit obtuse … a little slow on the uptake … basically, an idiot, to think that abstinence-only programs are a “colossal failure.”

Well, I never believed this day would come … but by the grace of God it did.

I suffered for two hours in the bright sunshine, heard hundreds of names read, walked across the podium and shook Al Mohler’s hand (I’m sure he was wondering, “Who is this guy, anyway?) and was conferred with the Master of Divinity by The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Here’s a cool pic with the beautiful women in my life.

This girl is a class act.  Anyone who thinks differently must be a bit slow on the uptake.

I hear through commenters that there are blogs and editorials out there that have been trashing Melinda … saying that she is a “fake.”  From my persepctive, it would seem impossible for anyone to “fake” that kind of sweet humility.

No, I think Melinda Doolittle is the real deal.  Her faith in Christ radiates.  She has had a pure and powerful witness for her Lord during her weeks on American Idol.  I’m proud of her.   And I’m thrilled that the world got to see her in her church on last night’s episode.

I think America is still in shock this morning.  But, like many of my commenters have said … I don’t think we have to worry about Melinda’s music career.  She’ll be just fine.

My only question is … do the show’s producers “own” her, or is she truly free?

America is stupid. An army of pre-teen girls sent American Idol’s best-ever singer (no one else has even come close) home tonight.

Her grace and faith in the middle of all of this stuff has been awesome.

I’m done with American Idol.

I don’t know what else to say … except that boy had better not win.

Eureka!  Dr. Doron Nof, professor of oceanography at florida State University, has figured it out!

Jesus didn’t walk on water.  He was actually walking on ice.

No, really, scholarly people came up with this idea and published it.  I suppose someone, somewhere, provided a grant or otherwise funded this project.

Oh, well, I guess God’s secret is out now, huh?

A story by Libby Fairhurst of FSU news reveals a summary of Dr. Nof’s article, “Is There A Paleolimnological Explanation for ‘Walking on Water’ in the Sea of Galilee?” that was published last year in the April 2006 issue of the Journal of Paleolimnology.

Dr Nof Explains:

The study points to a rare combination of optimal water and atmospheric conditions for development of a unique, localized freezing phenomenon that Nof and his co-authors call “springs ice.”

In what is now northern Israel, such ice could have formed on the cold freshwater surface of the Sea of Galilee—known as Lake Kinneret by modern-day Israelis—when already chilly temperatures briefly plummeted during one of the two protracted cold periods between 2,500 and 1,500 years ago.

A frozen patch floating on the surface of the small lake would have been difficult to distinguish from the unfrozen water surrounding it. The unfrozen water was comprised of the plumes resulting from salty springs situated along the lake’s western shore in Tabgha—an area where many archeological findings related to Jesus have been documented.

Using paleoceanographic records of the Mediterranean Sea’s surface temperatures along with analytical ice and statistical models, Nof and his colleagues focused on the dynamics of a small section of Lake Kinneret comprising about 10,000 square feet near the salty springs that empty into it. Their analysis supports the likelihood that a brief blast of frigid air descended over the lake and dropped to 25 F (-4 C) for at least two days, coinciding with the chill that had already settled in for a century or more and quite possibly encompassed the decades in which Jesus lived.

If these atmospheric conditions existed simultaneously over a lake such as Kinneret, a floating ice patch could develop above the plumes generated by the salty springs.

Yeah, right … and if the planets line up just right, the wind blows from the south, I have a bagel for breakfast, my cell phone is on, and my keys are in my left pocket … then once every thousand years I can sing the theme song from “The Sound of Music” from by backside.

It never ceases to amaze me the hoops that intelligent, educated people will jump through in an attempt to disprove the events of the Word of God.

In my opinion, it takes an INCREDIBLE (unbelievable) amount of faith to believe in a theory like that.  Personally, I’ll just believe Jesus.

I’m a Survivor junkie.  I’ve been watching it since about halfway through the first season.  I love to watch the dynamics of the tribes.  In some sick way, I like to watch people interact when they are reduced to their most primal form.

But, in fourteen seasons of the show, I have never been as disappointed in someone as I am tonight.  I don’t even want to watch any more of the program.   About fifteen minutes ago, I watched a man completely destroy (sell) his integrity.

His name is Andria Herd … better known as “Dreamz.”  Hailing from Wilmington, North Carolina, “Dreamz” is a formerly homeless man who now works as a cheerleading coach.  His stated goal for winning the competition was to “help kids.”  He made it to the final five positions in the game … then he was faced with a choice.

On Thursday’s episode, the fierce competitor (and deserving winner of the entire competition) Yau-Man won a $60,000 F-350 utility pick-up in the season’s car challenge.  Prior to the challenge, “Dreamz” made it clear that he had never owned a vehicle.  He begged the other people to help him win the car.  When Yau won the picture-perfect truck, he immediately offered it to “Dreamz” in a special deal.  If they both made it to the final four in the competition, and “Dreamz” won immuity, he would give it to Yau-Man in exchange for the truck.  “Dreamz” immediately accepted the deal and promised Yau-Man that he would give him immunity … if he won it.  Indeed, he said, “I swear to God (I’ll give you the immunity idol.)”  So Yau-Man, in good faith, gave him the keys.

Well, as fate would have it, “Dreamz” won that immunity in the first hour of the season finale tonight.  He had the opportunity to follow through on his word.  All he had to to to demonstrate the power of integrity was take off his immunity necklace and hand it to Yau-Man.  Instead, he chose selfishness … he chose the true “idol” of money … and he kept the neceklace.

Even worse than that, he promptly cast a vote for Yau-Man and saw to it that he was cast out of the competiton.

As I’m sitting here watching the final “Tribal Council,” the subject of integrity seems to be coming up over and over again.  The cast member named “Boo” just confronted “Dreamz” based upon his claim to be a Christian.  Wow!  He encouraged him that someday he might become “…a strong Christian, who can tell the Devil to ‘dangle all the money you want in front of me, but this Christian can’t be bought.’ “  Interesting, in a game that is built upon lies, deceit, back-stabbing, and the complete absence of integrity.

What do you think?  Did you watch the show?  Can this man ever recover from such a blatant lie and lapse in integrity?  Was a truck really worth it?  We all have “blow it” in our lives from time to time … but few of us have ever done so before millions of television viewers.

I predict that Earl will win, easily, because there really is no other choice.  How sad.